George Abaraonye, of the Oxford Union, wants a word with you

The New Neo Posted on by

In the midst of all the shocking reactions from the left to Charlie Kirk’s assassination, there was this:

“Charlie Kirk got shot, let’s f***ing go,” George Abaraonye, a 20-year-old Politics, Philosophy and Economics student and the incoming president of the Oxford Union, wrote in a WhatsApp group on Wednesday. On Instagram he added: “Charlie Kirk got shot loool.” …

The Union cannot immediately sack Abaraonye. According to its constitution, unless the president-elect resigns, 150 members need to sign a petition to demand a confidence vote. And Abaraonye was already a well-known, well-liked figure in Oxford. He ranked fifth in a recent “Big Names On Campus” list and is currently vice-president of the popular African and Caribbean Society. Friends describe him as “laid-back”.

Abaraonye only decided to run for president two days before the Union election. One ex-president described Abaraonye to me as a “joke candidate”. There was some controversy over his campaign tactics. A Union insider tells me a tribunal will be held to investigate the circumstances of election and whether there was any “electoral malpractice”. (At the Oxford Union, such scandals and investigations are common.) …

A lot of the attacks on Abaraonye have been explicitly racist. After the Daily Mail drew attention to his ABB A-Level results, below the usual 3As required, he has been called online a “worthless DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] hire” who should be “deported”.

I don’t doubt many have been racist – I’ve seen some myself that are. But calling him a diversity hire is not racist. If his grades are in fact as reported, below the usual standards, he is most likely a DEI admission. But it’s my impression he is a native-born Brit.

He must have thought the sort of things he wrote about Kirk were just fine. What strikes me is how juvenile his words were in addition to being cruel. More or less at the level of sophistication of what you might expect from Garth and Wayne of “Wayne’s World.” Of course in line with his ultra-casual clothes at the Kirk debate, which were a statement as well.

From the Oxford Union a while back, on the subject:

In a statement posted on social media on Saturday, the union reiterated that it had already condemned the president-elect’s “inappropriate remarks”. The society added: “We emphasise that these are his personal views and not those of the Union, nor do they represent the values of our institution.

“At the same time, we are deeply disturbed by and strongly condemn the racial abuse and threats that George has faced in response. No individual should ever be attacked because of the colour of their skin or the community they come from. Threats to his life are abhorrent. Such rhetoric has no place online, or anywhere in society.”

Threats to his life are abhorrent, but he mocked Kirk’s shooting. It sounds as though whoever wrote the statement was far more concerned about the things said to Abaraonye than what Abaraonye himself said. But in the interests of clarity, I’ll add that Abaraonye’s remarks were written prior to the announcement of Kirk’s death. That does not excuse him in the least. It was apparent even from the first reports that the wound was extremely serious and might even be fatal. Nor would mocking even a wound such as Trump’s ear wound be okay. None of it is okay, and especially ironic given that this is a debating society.

To me, this is another indication of the domination of a gamer/twitter/cartoonish mentality in young people even in instutitions such as Oxford. To many of them, shooting is like something in a video game, to make a joke about in order to impress your peers who think it’s oh so funny to do so.

More of his “apology”:

On Thursday, Abaraonye said he had “reacted impulsively” to the news of Kirk’s shooting, and that the comments were “quickly deleted” after news emerged of his death.

“Those words did not reflect my values,” Abaraonye added. “Nobody deserves to be the victim of political violence … I extend my condolences to his family and loved ones.

“At the same time, my reaction was shaped by the context of Mr Kirk’s own rhetoric – words that often dismissed or mocked the suffering of others. He described the deaths of American children from school shootings as an acceptable ‘cost’ of protecting gun rights. He justified the killing of civilians in Gaza, including women and children, by blaming them collectively for Hamas. He called for the retraction of the Civil Rights Act, and repeatedly spread harmful stereotypes about LGBTQ and trans communities. These were horrific and dehumanising statements.”

Of course Abaronye’s words reflect his values. No one made him write them. His values are to mock someone who got shot while debating in the public square. He can try to walk it back but even that was done in a way that reveals his “values.” The “yes, but” type of thing, the mischaracterization of Kirk’s beliefs, is unfortunately typical of leftist discourse.

This was a warning note, one Abaronye did not heed:

It can also be revealed that 200 life members of the debating society – former Oxford University students who have paid to retain their membership – have expressed their willingness to support a vote of no confidence in Mr Abaraonye’s leadership.

This surpasses the 150 signatures required to bring no-confidence proceedings. …

The campaign to oust Mr Abaraonye is being organised by Allum Bokhari, an Oxford Union life member and managing director of the Foundation for Freedom Online, a US censorship watchdog.

Explaining his decision to rally Oxford Union life members to submit signatures, Mr Bokhari told The Telegraph: “The most final act of censorship is a bullet.

“Celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk, whose only crime was talking to his ideological opponents, is completely antithetical to every moral and democratic principle the Oxford Union Society represents, not least free speech and the freedom to exchange ideas without the threat of violence.”

If you’re wondering – as I was – what’s the ethnic background of Bokhari, the surname is apparently Persian and the first name usually Muslim. Hail, Mr. Bokhari.

And it seems Bokhari got the last word, because more recently Abaronye himself called for the Oxford Union to have the vote. He seems to have thought he would win it:

This is a chance for us to stand against the racism of the far right, and to stand up for the principles the Union has championed for 200 years. Two centuries later, the same people who claim to believe in the Union are now acting in stark opposition to the Union’s founding principles, by supporting a campaign of harassment, censorship and abuse. We will not be silenced.

But he hadn’t counted on one particular element of the vote:

Abaraonye evidently believed that he could mobilise his supporters to win the no confidence vote, but he had not anticipated that it would be opened up to life members. The Spectator has reported that Abaraonye and his supporters then ‘moved a revenge motion of no confidence in the current president, Moosa Harraj, for allowing alumni to vote on Saturday’. Worse still, there have been allegations that the returning officer was subjected to intimidation and so the voting process was temporarily suspended.

In spite of these plot twists, the final result was conclusive. 1,228 voted in favour of the no confidence motion and 501 against (with 17 ballots spoilt). This met the required threshold of a two-thirds majority, and the motion has been carried. This amounts to an effective resignation by Abaraonye, but inevitably he is now contesting the result.

Abaraonye’s vile comments were especially ironic, of course, considering that this is a debating society, and Kirk dedicated his life to the belief that debate was the way for opponents to do battle rather than with actual literal weapons.

However, I think that if the voting had been limited to present members, it’s highly possible the results would have gone the other way.

Psaki and friends on Usha Vance – the left’s Handmaid’s Tale fantasies

The New Neo Posted on by

This is what I’m talking about:

“I think the little Manchurian candidate, JD Vance, wants to be president more than anything else,” Psaki claimed.

“I always wonder what is going on in the mind of his wife [Usha]. Are you okay? Please blink four times. Come over here, we’ll save you,” she imagined, making up some kind of weird scenario about her, seeming to imply she has something to fear. Do Democrats not understand what a happy marriage looks like?

“Little”? “Manchurian candidate”? This woman was once Biden’s press secretary, you may recall. So “Manchurian candidate” is certainly an odd appellation for her to use for J. D. Vance.

But it’s the idea of Usha as some sort of hostage that’s especially creepy. And it’s not an isolated thought. I heard it many times about Melania, from acquaintances of mine during Trump’s first term especially (see this). The idea is that these wives are being held hostage and live in fear, which is both repulsive and condescending. It’s as though they were taken by human traffickers – their husbands – and need to send a covert signal for rescue.

Rescue by the likes of Jen Psaki.

It’s somewhat of a Handmaid’s Tale fantasy, a book and movie that seem to take up a great deal of space in the minds of leftist women. It also reminds me of a very creepy film from 1965 – The Collector:

The Collector is a 1965 psychological horror film[4][5] directed by William Wyler, adapted by Stanley Mann and John Kohn from the 1963 novel by John Fowles. It stars Terence Stamp as a young man who abducts a beautiful art student, played by Samantha Eggar, holding her captive in the basement of his rural farmhouse.

I recall it as being pretty awful.

ADDENDUM:
And now I suddenly remember this:

NYC mayor’s poll tightens – if there were a 2-person race

The New Neo Posted on by

Only thing is – it almost certainly won’t be a 2-person race.

Here’s the poll:

The newly released report by Gotham Polling and the city AARP found that 44.6% of New Yorkers would vote for Mamdani if Sliwa quit the race, compared to 40.7% saying they’d back Cuomo — with a margin of error of 4 points that puts Cuomo within striking distance.

With all three remaining in the race, Mamdani would continue to trounce the opposition, taking 43.2% of the vote compared to 28.9% for Cuomo and 19.4% for Sliwa, according to the poll.

Notice that the numbers only add up to around 85% in the 2-way race. That leaves a lot of “undecideds,” enough to give a victory to Cuomo if they went his way. Notice also that if Sliwa dropped out, nearly all of his voters who would be “decided” would go to Cuomo.

However, Sliwa is adamant that he’s not dropping out, and I believe him. He seems to think there’s little difference between Cuomo and Mamdani anyway, as he makes clear in the video I just linked.

And it’s true that they’re both abominable. But they’re not identical. For example, I think that if Mamdani is elected, far more NYC police will quit than if Cuomo is elected, and crime will soar. And of course, Mamdani is highly anti-Israel. Now, maybe in a mayor that’s not so important. But it sets an ominous tone and is part of a worrisome trend.

I assume that a lot of you don’t care about New York, or even actively think if New Yorkers elect Mamdani they will deserve what they get. But I know many people who live there, and it’s my home town. I remember when it was a wonderful place, and not all that long ago.

As William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection says in a post titled “How We Got Mamdani,” this is the fruit of many decades of leftist control of education:

I think the left was very savvy and very strategic. They identified the weakness in our society and the weakness in our society is the educational system. And they understood that if they can get control of the educational system, they can change the country.

Indeed.

We are all obese now

The New Neo Posted on by

Or at least, the vast majority of us are, according to a recent re-definition:

Obesity rates in the United States may increase dramatically under a new definition introduced earlier this year by the Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology Commission.

Researchers at Mass General Brigham discovered that applying the updated criteria—which expands beyond the traditional body mass index (BMI) to include measurements of body fat distribution—raised obesity prevalence from around 40 percent to approximately 70 percent among more than 300,000 participants. The increase was especially notable among older adults. The study also revealed that many of the newly classified individuals faced a greater likelihood of negative health outcomes.

Who’s celebrating? The makers of diet drugs and the purveyors of diet programs.

It’s all very odd – particularly since there’s also been evidence that being somewhat overweight – even by the old definition – is somewhat beneficial for the elderly:

In fact, the nationwide study found that people who were slightly overweight in their 50s but kept their weight relatively stable were the most likely to survive over the next 16 years.

They had better survival rates than even normal-weight individuals whose weight increased slightly, but stayed within the normal range.

There are other studies that say something similar:

… [N]umerous studies suggest that carrying some extra weight can sometimes be protective in later life. For people who fall, fat can serve as padding, guarding against fractures. And for people who become seriously ill with conditions such as cancer or advanced kidney disease, that padding can be a source of energy, helping them tolerate demanding therapies. …

Experts are more concerned about a lack of activity in older adults who are overweight or mildly obese (a body mass index in the low 30s) than about weight loss. With minimal or no activity, muscle mass deteriorates and strength decreases, which “raises the risk of developing a disability or a functional impairment” that can interfere with independence, said John Batsis, an obesity researcher and associate professor of medicine at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine in Chapel Hill.

Weight loss contributes to inadequate muscle mass insofar as muscle is lost along with fat. For every pound shed, 25% comes from muscle and 75% from fat, on average.

Since older adults have less muscle to begin with, “if they want to lose weight, they need to be willing at the same time to increase physical activity.” said Anne Newman, director of the Center for Aging and Population Health at the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health.

Ideal body weight may be higher. Epidemiologic research suggests that the ideal body mass index (BMI) might be higher for older adults than younger adults. (BMI is a measure of a person’s weight, in kilograms or pounds, divided by the square of their height, in meters or feet.)

One large, well-regarded study found that older adults at either end of the BMI spectrum — those with low BMIs (under 22) and those with high BMIs (over 33) — were at greater risk of dying earlier than those with BMIs in the middle range (22 to 32.9).

Older adults with the lowest risk of earlier deaths had BMIs of 27 to 27.9. According to World Health Organization standards, this falls in the “overweight” range …

And then, to top it all off, there’s this seeming paradox:

Deficiency of the gene melanocortin 4 receptor (MC4R) is linked with obesity among adults. A recent study has found that the same deficiency also leads to surprising outcomes such as reduced risk of heart disease, lower cholesterol, and triglycerides. These results contradict the well-established correlation between obesity and cardiovascular diseases.

The researchers scanned the genetic profiles of 7,719 children from the Genetics of Obesity Study (GOOS) cohort. They identified 316 probands—first person in a family to draw medical attention to a genetic disorder—and 144 adult family members with obesity due to loss-of-function (LoF) MC4R mutations.

Even after adjusting for weight, these individuals showed better blood pressure profiles and cardiovascular health when compared to 336,728 controls from the UK Biobank.

The gene defect ordinarily causes severe obesity, and I don’t think it’s all that common even in that population. So unless you’re very obese I don’t think there’s any chance you have it.

I think the issue of weight and health is quite poorly understood – and that includes why some people can eat a lot and be thin, and vice versa. Except for the new weight-loss drugs – and who knows how they affect health long-term – it’s very hard for most people to lose weight and keep it off.

Democrats stand by their man Jay Jones

The New Neo Posted on by

It’s too late for Democrats in Virginia to get a replacement, and so they’re sticking with the deathwish-on-opponents-fantasizing Jay Jones, their candidate for AG. They idea is that the “D” after his name will be enough, and perhaps it will.

But there’s also this [emphasis mine]:

A random person gets popped in the face at a Trump rally for any number of reasons that might arise at a close gathering of thousands of people, and for days we’re treated to a national lecture from the media about the rise of right-wing violence. But a Democrat’s text messages are made public and in them he suggests he’d rather shoot a Republican than Hitler, and, well, the race is roiled! And those messages are a few years old, anyway, so what does it matter?

Like the Post, the nerdy Politico also ran a headline portraying Jones’ sadistic deliberations as though they were merely a bad poll for Democrats rather than a depraved and disqualifying revelation. “Democratic candidate’s ‘abhorrent’ texts threaten to shake up bellwether Virginia elections,” it said. The word “abhorrent” was apparently something that had to be attributed to someone in quotes — in this case, Jones himself — rather than standing on its own as an objective fact. And my, oh, didn’t the messages shake up the campaign in a bellwether state. We’ve got a nail-biter!

It’s simple. The media react one way when it’s political violence they can attribute to Republicans and a different way when it’s demonstrably coming from Democrats. They do that because they sincerely believe one form of political violence is justifiable. We know which one it is.

In other words, they agree with Jones and they’re not the bit scandalized or even offended by what he wrote. I’ve discussed this violent deathwish prevalence among Democrats before. I’ve seen it shared – quite casually – by people I know, and that’s been true for about a decade. Usually it has been about Trump, but it seems to have broadened in recent years to include the GOP in general. The Overton Window has moved considerably:

The political commentator Joshua Treviño has postulated six degrees of acceptance of public ideas: “roughly”

unthinkable
radical
acceptable
sensible
popular
policy

Among Democrats, I’d say that the idea of the assassination of opponents has reached the “popular” phase. It’s not official policy yet, but it has a great deal of approval.

It’s one of those roundup days again

The New Neo Posted on by

(1) As Comey and Bolton go, so goes Brennan, if the DOJ chooses to act:

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee on Oct. 21 referred former CIA Director John Brennan to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution, alleging Brennan made false statements in his 2023 testimony before Congress about the Trump-Russia investigation.

“John Brennan lied to Congress,” Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said in a post on X in reference to the President Barack Obama appointee. “Today, we referred him to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.”

Specifically, Jordan said in his letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi that evidence newly declassified by appointees of Trump at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence confirms Brennan falsely testified on May 11, 2023, when he said “the CIA was not involved at all with the (Steele) dossier.” …

“As the newly declassified documents demonstrate, Brennan eagerly wanted to include information from the Steele dossier in the (Intelligence Community Assessment), a fact Brennan himself documented in writing,” Jordan wrote, in reference to a classified CIA intelligence assessment about Russian interference in the election.

No one is above the law – except when their friends are in power.

(2) Graham Platner, a Democrat of Maine trying to defeat Susan Collins, has a Nazi tattoo (SS death’s head) that he claims he got twenty years ago in Croatia when he was in the US military on leave – and drunk. Mary Chastain, author of the post I just linked, writes:

I call absolute BS, and if it is true, then you’d better get tested for diseases because no legitimate tattoo artist in the world would ever tattoo a “very inebriated” person.

She seems to know a lot about tattoos, having seven of them. I’ll defer to her greater knowledge, since I have none. But one thing I do know is that you can get tattoos removed, and twenty years is a long time.

(3) Japan’s new prime minister is female, conservative, and an admirer of Thatcher:

The country’s parliament elected veteran ultraconservative lawmaker Sanae Takaichi to serve as the next prime minister on Tuesday, making her the first woman to take Japan’s highest public office.

Takaichi is an admirer of Margaret Thatcher, Britain’s first female prime minister who was nicknamed the “Iron Lady.”

She favors a strong economy and a strong military, and, according to interviews with Japanese media, a strong drum riff.

… Speaking on Japanese radio station Tokyo FM’s “BABYMETAL” podcast in August, Takaichi confirmed a longtime affinity for the iconic British heavy metal band Iron Maiden, but said her favorite artist was Japanese drummer Yoshiki, of the X JAPAN rock band from Chiba.

… She used to play the drums in a heavy metal band that did Black Sabbath and Deep Purple covers, and CBS News’ Japanese partner network TBS says there’s still an electronic drum kit in her parliamentary residence — though she plays with headphones to avoid interrupting her colleagues.

She’s pro-US:

Takaichi cited the Japan-U.S. alliance as a “cornerstone” of Japanese diplomacy and stressed that Japan is an indispensable partner for America in its strategy to provide counterweights to China in the Indo-Pacific region. Trump is scheduled to visit Japan next Monday to Wednesday.

While Takaichi made history by becoming the first female leader of a country where men still largely hold sway, she has not promoted gender equality or diversity.

(4) Republican John Sununu of New Hampshire says he’s running for the Senate:

Sununu announced his decision in a video in which he said that even he was surprised by his decision to seek the Republican nomination for the seat.

“Washington, as anyone who observes can see, is a little dysfunctional right now,” Sununu said in an exclusive interview with News 9. “There’s yelling, there’s inactivity. We’ve got a government shutdown. Friends, family, they always say, ‘Why would anyone want to work there?’ And the short answer is it’s important to New Hampshire. It’s important that we have someone who knows how to get things done.”

Sununu’s entry into the race sets up a Republican primary with another former U.S. senator, Scott Brown, and a competition for the support of President Donald Trump. Sununu’s past opposition to Trump is well-documented, and he said he’s not focused on seeking the president’s endorsement.

This may sound confusing, because there have been a lot of politicians named Sununu in NH. One is the father, John, who was governor of New Hampshire and quite conservative. His two sons, Chris and John, are more RINO-ish. John was a House member and then US senator, but hasn’t been since 2008. Chris was recently governor. And you may remember Scott Brown, Sununu’s Republican rival, as having been a senator from Massachusetts elected to stop Obamacare. He actually has NH roots and has lived primarily there for quite some time.

New Hampshire is now a purple state, but only because Republicans often win the governorship, as well as controlling the state legislature. They do not do well at the House or Senate level, and the Democrat frontrunner for 2026 is the popular Chris Pappas.

(5) There’s a drive in California to put an initiative about voter ID on the ballot:

DeMaio’s Reform California, the organization behind the initiative, points out recent polling indicating that 68 percent of Californians support requiring an ID to vote, while 73 percent support requiring verification of citizenship. These measures are broadly seen as essential to election security, meaning that elected Democrats won’t like the idea.

Should be interesting.

The Louvre heist

The New Neo Posted on by

I imagine many if not most of you have visited the Louvre, so I’m not telling you anything you don’t know when I say that the place is big. Really, really huge. So it must be quite difficult to secure.

That said, if it’s your job to prevent thefts there, you’ve got to be effective and to be effective you may need to be creative. The thieves certainly were:

In a minutes-long strike Sunday inside the world’s most-visited museum, thieves rode a basket lift up the Louvre ’s facade, forced a window, smashed display cases and fled with priceless Napoleonic jewels, officials said.

The daylight heist about 30 minutes after opening, with visitors already inside, was among the highest-profile museum thefts in living memory and comes as staff complained that crowding and thin staffing are straining security. …

Around 9:30 a.m., several intruders forced a window, cut panes with a disc cutter and went straight for the glass display cases, officials said. Interior Minister Laurent Nunez said the crew entered from outside using a basket lift via the riverfront facade to reach the hall with the 23-item royal collection.

Their target was the gilded Apollon Gallery, where the Crown Diamonds are displayed, including the Regent, the Sancy and the Hortensia.

The thieves smashed two display cases and fled on motorbikes, Nunez said. No one was hurt. Alarms brought Louvre agents to the room, forcing the intruders to bolt, but the theft was already done.

Creative and yet simple, exploiting what was probably a long-existent vulnerability. I have questions that I haven’t seen answered, such as: has anyone ever used this modus operandi before? What sort of alarm system does the museum have? Why is it short-staffed (I assume not enough money), and did this contribute to the time lag in “agents” arriving? Are the agents armed, and if not, how would they be stopping the thieves even had they arrived much earlier?

The head of the Louvre and the head of its security are both women. Are they incompetent DEI hires? Perhaps. But did they jettison previous security measures that would have prevented this theft? Did they fail to follow normal protective measures? I’ve not seen any indications of either, but it might come out with time. That certainly was true with our own Secret Service in Butler, Pennsylvania.

NOTE: This heist immediately made me think of this scene, which made a deep impression on me in 1964:

The COVID vaccine and cancer treatment

The New Neo Posted on by

Surprise! The COVID vaccine may enhance the effectiveness of certain cancer treatments; see this:

Cancer patients who received mRNA COVID vaccines within 100 days of starting immunotherapy were twice as likely to be alive three years after treatment as those who never received a vaccine

These findings have prompted a randomized Phase III trial to determine if mRNA COVID vaccines should be part of the standard of care for this type of therapy

If validated, findings could significantly increase the number of patients who benefit from immunotherapy.

There are plenty of people who cite the vaccine as having an enormous number of bad effects. I’ve written countless posts on this blog refuting the evidence against the research they cite to supposedly prove this. The exception is myocarditis – which I’ve also discussed at some length, and is a danger which has been known for a long time for young men who receive the shot. Every study I’ve found of other serious effects of the vaccine either does not say what anti-COVID-vaxxers purport it says, or has a research design so poor as to make it meaningless. I’m not going to go over this territory again right now, but it’s all on the blog, some of it here but much of it in the comments.

I’ve never advocated the vaccine for children or healthy young people, however. Nor have I ever felt it should be required. Each person should make his or her own decision about it, and I am fine with a decision either way.

Hunting Trump

The New Neo Posted on by

They won’t give up until they kill him, or die trying.

This is very disturbing:

The US Secret Service is investigating what could be a sniper’s nest or a hunting stand near an area where President Trump’s Air Force One has recently been kept at Palm Beach International Airport, according to sources.

The suspicious stand, found Thursday, is in a tree and within the line of sight of the section of the airport where Trump exits the presidential jet, and was described to The Post by law enforcement sources as an odd collection of pipes. …

Authorities do not know yet whether it is a hunting stand or merely junk in a tree — or has a more nefarious purpose, sources said.

The area could be used by hunters who go after invasive green iguanas, the sources added.

Let’s hope the latter.

But it doesn’t stop so many people from openly wishing him dead.

NOTE: When I was at the article I linked in the above post, I saw a link to an article about a Trump-menacing interview with Colombia’s president. Not noticing the spelling of the word “Colombia,” I assumed it referred to the president of the NY college. That seemed highly plausible to me. Of course, that’s spelled “Columbia.” This threat came from the president of the South American country:

“The easiest way [to change Trump] may be through Trump himself,” Petro [president of Colombia] added. “If not — get rid of Trump,” he continued, snapping his fingers dramatically.

Petro later denied he’d been threatening Trump; he was just saying the American people should get rid of him. He didn’t say how, of course; there’s no election in the future for Trump. The American people can’t impeach and convict him; that’s for Congress to do and it’s not going to be happening (the conviction part, that is; the impeachment part will definitely happen if the Democrats get control of the House. They will be going for the Trump-impeachment hat trick, but without an enormous majority in the Senate it won’t matter any more than the previous ones did, and probably even less.)